A shipwreck cargo of Sevillian pottery from the Studland Bay wreck, Dorset, UK

The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology (2003) 32.1: 24–41doi:10.1006/ijna.2003.1068

A shipwreck cargo of Sevillian pottery from the Studland Baywreck, Dorset, UK

Alejandra Gutierrez, with a contribution on fabric analysis by David Williams andM. J. HughesDepartment of Archaeology, University of Durham, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK

This article is an account of the pottery found at the Studland Bay wreck, Poole. The assemblage includes an important groupof Spanish pottery made at Seville at the beginning of the 16th century, including the largest group of lustreware andblue-and-purple wares ever found in an archaeological context. These wares were probably carried as cargo and collected at astopping-off point along the itinerary of the ship, probably to be sold in northern Europe

� 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Nautical Archaeology Society

Key words: 16th-century shipwreck, Seville pottery, lusterwares, Spanish tin-glazed pottery, fabric analysis, Spanish trade

T he shipwreck in Studland Bay was firstidentified by Hamworthy Sub Aqua Clubdivers and excavated over several seasons

between 1984 and 1992 (Fig. 1). Initially, the workwas conducted by the Studland Bay WreckCompany composed of members of the PooleMaritime Trust, Hamworthy Sub Aqua Club andBorough of Poole. From 1989–1992 the PooleBay Archaeological Group continued to excavateunder the diving direction of Mike Markey.Archaeological directors were Ian Horsey andKeith Jarvis and many volunteer divers andcompanies assisted with the project. The sitehas never been published in its entiretythough summaries of the project are available(Hutchinson, 1991; Ladle, 1993) as well as morespecialist studies. Analysis of the boat and ballastconcluded that the boat was of Basque origin andsunk sometime towards the end of the 15th orbeginning of the 16th century, perhaps before1530, the date at which Henry VIII forcedhis divorce on his Spanish Queen, Katherineof Aragon, and relations between England andSpain began to deteriorate (Thomsen, 2000).

This article is an account of the pottery foundat the wreck site. The assemblage is of particularinterest to archaeologists because it is the mostimportant group of Seville lustreware and tinglaze decorated in blue and purple recovered froman archaeological context in Europe and the

1057–2414/03/010024+18 $30.00/0

Americas. While some of the 16th and 17th-century tin-glazed pottery from Seville is awell-known import outside Spain, lustreware hadnever been identified before on an archaeologicalsite. Chemical analysis of the pottery found on thewreck confirms the place of manufacture of thesevessels and opens up new possibilities for researchinto Spanish lustreware production of this period.In the following text English names used forMorisco wares follow a recent reassessment(Gutierrez, 2000), while the American namesgiven by Goggin (1968) are quoted in squarebrackets.

The potterySome 373 fragments of pottery were recoveredfrom the wreck. The range of pottery typesrecovered and their source are very limited,consisting predominantly of Seville MoriscoWare, together with a few lead-glazed vessels,Merida-type Ware, Saintonge and Bretoncoarsewares (Fig. 2).

Seville Morisco WareSevillian pottery forms the largest part of theassemblage, representing 68% of all that wasrecovered from the wreck. Two types are pre-dominant: Blue and Purple [Isabela Polychrome]

� 2003 The Nautical Archaeology Society

ALEJANDRA GUTIEuRREZ: SEVILLIAN POTTERY FROM THE STUDLAND BAY WRECK

Figure 1. Location map of the Studland Bay wreck.

and Lustreware. Both types are consistent withthe typical characteristics of the so-called‘Morisco Ware’ made in Seville between the endof the 15th and first half of the 16th centuries(Gutierrez, 2000). Morisco wares have a cream-coloured sandy fabric, with very few inclusionsvisible to the naked eye. The vessels are com-pletely covered with a rich white tin glaze whichhas been used as a background for painteddecoration; several colours are applied onto thevisible areas (external surfaces on closed formsand internal surfaces on open vessels). Forms arequickly turned on the wheel, with little attentionto detail or finish, and have very standardizedprofiles.

The state of survival of the pottery is variable.Colours and patterns are still visible on most ofthe Blue and Purple fragments, the main problembeing posed by the lustrewares. Due to the chemi-cal composition of the colour (Amigues, 1995),lustre can decompose very easily and can dis-appear completely from the surface depending onthe conditions of deposition. All but two ofthe Studland sherds have lost their originalgolden colour; in some cases the decoration hasblackened, masking colours but leaving visiblepatterns. Where the lustre has perished com-pletely the decoration can usually be distinguishedeither by placing the sherd against the sunlight(lustred areas leave a matt mark against the

25

NAUTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, 32.1

Figure 2. Places mentioned in the text and sources of potteryfound aboard the Studland Bay wreck.

26

Figure 3. Lustreware sherd as recovered from the wreck, andwith photo enhancement to detect decoration (Photo: PooleMuseum).

shiny undecorated tin glaze), under ultra-violetlight or by photographic enhancement (Fig. 3).Nevertheless, there are still a few sherds (22fragments in all; 9% of the Morisco Warefrom the wreck) which are so badly eroded andblackened by the sea that their decoration cannotbe deciphered.

Blue and Purple pottery is characterised byconcentric bands and lines decorated in these twocolours, with a geometrical or floral band near therim (Fig. 4). This band is usually filled with simplemotifs, freely executed and rarely repeated exactlyfrom vessel to vessel. The sherds from theStudland Bay wreck add new patterns to thealready known range of decoration; most ofthe designs from the wreck use a ‘comma’ motif inblue (large dot with a quarter moon, sometimesjoined), alternating with simple flowers or groupsof strokes in several different orientations (Fig. 5).Other motifs seem to resemble letters, spaciouslydistributed along the edge of the dish (Fig. 5, no.1). All the fragments recovered are from dishes(82 fragments) about 25–26 cm in diameter.Profiles are characteristic of the Morisco Waredish, with a central boss, sloping walls, and asmall change of angle on the interior surface halfway up the wall. An estimate of the minimumnumber of vessels was carried out examining the

pattern present along the rim and taking intoconsideration the size of the sherds. In this way aminimum number of 13 dishes was calculated.

Most of the Seville Lustreware from the wreckcomprises the same type of dish as that decoratedin Blue and Purple, though with a slightly smallerdiameter (22–23 cm). In total, the minimumnumber of dishes present is 12 (125 fragments).All these dishes which had been decorated withlustre share an identical decorative scheme: twobands of motifs in lustre, one representing smallfloral motifs in the middle of the wall, the otherRoman (rather than Gothic) lettering closer to therim, originally a deciphering of Latin phraseswhich were then so mechanically and rapidlycopied that they have lost their true character(Fig. 6). Only two fragments seem to be decoratedsolely with lustreware, without any recognizableblue lines. Generally, the boss (concave base) was


Figure 4. Fragments of Blue and Purple [Isabela Polychrome] as recovered from the wreck (Photo:Poole Museum).

decorated with a simple lustre floral motif whilethree groups of fine blue lines limit the lustredpatterns on the walls. These motifs are a directcopy of the popular Valencian lustreware prod-ucts of the 16th century, where exactly the sametype of small flower can be identified (Fig. 7). Incontrast to the Seville vessels, however, the writ-ing on most Valencian lustreware is fully legibleand can be read as phrases such as ‘SurgeDomine’ (arise Lord) or ‘In principium verbumerat’ (In the beginning was the Word).

Other forms decorated with lustred decorationwere also found at the wreck site, although infewer numbers. At least two lugged bowls (7 frag)of 11 and 14 cm in diameter respectively havebeen identified (Fig. 8, nos 7–8); they shareexactly the same decorative scheme as the dishesabove. A larger type of dish (36 cm diameter)has a more complex decoration: triangularimpressions along the flange were sometimes filledin with blue, while the rest of the surface wasdecorated with small motifs, namely radiatedcircles (or milanos), dots and striped leaves. Belowthe wall angle a band of Roman lettering ispositioned above another band which repeats thefloral motifs (Fig. 8, nos 1–5). There were at leastfour of these large dishes (16 fragments) togetherwith at least three pedestal jugs (15 sherds), withspouts and single handle (Fig. 8, nos 11–14).Lustre decoration was visible on one fragment,though insufficient to reconstruct the originaldesign (Fig. 9).

There were also two bowls, which weredecorated exclusively in lustre. The most completeof these has an unusual profile, with a very highbase (Fig. 8, no. 9) which originally was thoughtto be a plain tin-glazed vessel [Columbia Plain](Hurst, 1991: 51). Examination under ultra-violetlight showed that it had been decorated with thepattern of the ‘musical notes’, distributed in con-centric bands and densely covering the entireinterior surface. This motif is well known inValencian workshops of the 16th century (Fig. 10)and appears in excavations in England, forexample in Portsmouth and Southampton (Allan,1995; Platt et al., 1975: 205, 1295). Thesecond bowl, on the other hand, shows the samedecorative scheme as the small dishes, althoughonly the upper band with the characteristicRoman lettering is visible (Fig. 8, no. 10).

At least five vases with straight necks andglobular bodies were also present, but no obvioussign of any lustre was visible, making it impossibleto determine if they were just rendered in plaintin glaze or decorated with the golden colour(Fig. 10). Although the fragments are smallin size, it is evident that all the necks hadpunched out decoration, probably similar to theillustrated example (Fig. 8, no. 11); sadly notenough had survived to reconstruct the completeprofile.

A unique fragment of a large dish wasdecorated with lustre on blue glaze in a mannerreminiscent of the large dishes described above,

27


Figure 5. Seville Blue and Purple [Isabela Polychrome] from the Studland Bay wreck. Nos 1 and 10 did notpreserve their colours.

28


Figure 6. Seville Lustreware dishes from the Studland Bay wreck.

29


Lead-glazed waresThere were four lead-glazed vessels amongst thepottery assemblage. A basal angle fragment of ajar was partially covered with green glaze on theexterior; this fragment had the characteristicfabric of Seville coarsewares, such as olive jars,and may belong to a jar (Spanish orza) usedfor storage or transport of foodstuffs or othersubstances (Fig. 11, no. 1). The other three vesselsare jars. One of them (2 sherds) was glazed on theexterior with a honey-colour lead glaze, theother two had a brown glaze on the interior andexterior; one was one-handled and is almost com-plete except for the rim (Fig. 11, no. 2). The otherbrown jar shows scars which indicate it once hadtwo handles, although no rim fragments werefound to reconstruct the complete profile (Fig. 11,

30

no. 3, only showing the base). These jars have thered fabric and thick lead glaze so characteristic ofthe Spanish lead-glazed wares used widely acrossthe country, and they could also have originatedin Seville (see thin-sections in Appendix).

Portuguese coarsewares

Fragments of at least three or four costrels (51fragments) of Merida-type Ware were found (Fig.11, nos 4–6). The fabric and finish are character-istic of this type of pottery produced in theAlentejo area, with abundant mica and a redfabric covered with a pinkish brown slip on theexterior (see fabric description in Appendix). Thecostrels have small mouths and two strap handles;one of them still preserved the cork which hadsealed the contents inside, implying they weretravelling full aboard the ship. There is also a littlejar of thin walls with two incisions around theneck and a small dish (Fig. 11, no. 7).

Figure 7. Valencian pot with small flower motif and legible writing(SURGE DOMINE) (Photo: Victoria and Albert Picture Library).

Rights were not granted to include this figure in electronicmedia. Please refer to the printed journal.

French coarsewares

The other fragments of pottery from the wreckconsist of three sherds of an unglazed Saintonge

with the triangular impressions and similarpatterns (Fig. 8, no. 6). The use of lustreware oncoloured glazes is infrequent, and although a fewexamples are known to have been producedat other Spanish production centres (such asValencia and Malaga), this technique has notbeen identified so far in Seville workshops andlacks parallels.


Figure 8. Seville Lustreware from the Studland Bay wreck. No. 6 is decorated with lustre decoration over blueglaze.

31


pegau or large globular jug, typical of the late 15thor first half of the 16th century, and six fragmentsof a Breton coarseware jar (originally identifiedby John Allan) (Fig. 11, no. 8). The latter vesselhas a distinctive brown colour with abundantinclusions and super-abundant specks of micawhich gives the pot a shiny finish (see fabricdescription in Appendix).

Figure 9. Fragments of tin-glazed jugs recovered from the wreck; all thedecoration has been lost and the surface blackened. (Photo: Poole Museum)

An Unusual Cargo?With the opening of trade with the Americas,Seville retained a tight monopoly over theshipping and exchange between Spain and theNew World during the 16th and 17th centuries(Rodrıguez Salgado, 1988). This control affectedlocal pottery industries which suddenly foundthemselves faced with new markets, not only withthe demand for containers for traded goods, butalso to supply crockery for ships and for newsettlers travelling to the Spanish colonies.Numbers involved in pottery production hadreached 5000 by 1628 (Sanchez, 1994: 72). Singleorders and consignments for export could includemassive numbers of pots, such as the 15 tons ofcontainers (botijas peruleras or ‘olive jars’) carried

32

by one ship to America in 1574 (Sanchez, 1994:46) or the 50,000 plates, small bowls, potsand jugs required for the Armada ships in 1586(Martin, 1979: 299). Production was well enoughestablished for potters to hire ships directly andthen fill them full of pottery to be sold in Lisbon,Galicia in northern Spain, the Azores or theCanary islands for example (Otte, 1996: 123).

Pressures on production had an impact on thetypes of ‘Morisco wares’ produced. Decoratedtypes which were being produced in the secondhalf of the 15th century and were more labour-intensive, such as Cuerda Seca with its poly-chrome detailed decoration and Blue and Purple[Isabela Polychrome] with its patterned two-colour decoration, were abandoned by themiddle of the 16th century. They gave way toundecorated wares (plain tin glazed [ColumbiaPlain]) or those decorated in one colour withsimple motifs which were easy to reproduce, suchas concentric lines (Linear Blue [Yayal Blue onWhite]), sometimes with a single central motif(Decorated Blue [Santo Domingo Blue onWhite]). The production of lustreware seems tohave survived throughout the 16th century, butthe labour required to produce it, with its three


Figure 10. Valencian pot decorated with ‘musical notes’.(Photo: courtesy of the British Museum)

Rights were not granted to include this figure in

electronic media. Please refer to the printedjournal.

Figure 11. Seville lead-glazed wares (nos 1–3), Merida-type wares (nos 4–7) and Breton jar (no. 8).

kiln firings, and elaborate decoration, must haverendered it a more exclusive product. This ten-dency in the change of styles is best observed byfinds in North America, where Blue and Purpleand Cuerda Seca decline in numbers duringthe 16th century and are absent from sites oflater date in that century (Lister et al., 1982:47–53).

Seville products must have been a familiarsight, not only in the Spanish colonies of America,but also in Portugal and throughout her colonies,as well as northern Europe. Although containersand finewares travelled widely from Seville acrossall these areas, tin-glazed Morisco wares seem tohave had a more restricted distribution in north-ern Europe where their occurrence has often beenexplained as the result of direct contact withSpaniards (Hurst, 1991: 48), with a marked con-centration around the main ports of arrival oftheir ships and trade (Allan, 1995; Ponsford et al.,1995; Gutierrez, 2000). While Blue and Purple has

33


been found on around 20 sites on the British Isles(Gerrard et al., 1995: 284), Seville lustreware hasnever been identified there on an archaeologicalsite before, except for the recently identified dishfrom Bideford (Devon) which is a stray find fromthe 1930s (Gutierrez, forthcoming).

Such a lack of material might be related to thefact that although the production of lustreware inSeville had been suspected for some time fromdocumentary references, it is only recently thatlocal finds, albeit scarce, and fabric analysis, haveconfirmed their production in the city (Gutierrez,2000; Pleguezuelo et al., 1995; Pleguezuelo, 1996).The difficulty is that decoration used on 16th-century lustrewares from Seville, as seen on theStudland Bay wreck assemblage, follows closelythe range of patterns used by the more popularmanufacturers at Valencia at this time (theso-called Late Valencian Lustreware; Gutierrez,2000: 32; Hurst et al., 1986: 50) and fabrics fromboth centres are also visually similar, having a finetexture and no particular inclusions visible to thenaked eye. Only chemical analysis can confidentlytell them apart (see Appendix) and it seemsquite likely, therefore, that at least some of the16th-century lustreware previously identified asValencian on archaeological sites across Europeand North America may have been made inSeville. The ease with which the lustrewaredecoration disappears from the surface shouldalso strike a note of caution in the identification ofundecorated tin-glazed pottery [Columbia Plain],when it would certainly be worthwhile checkingfor invisible patterns under ultra-violet light.

The lead-glazed jars and non-commercialstorage jars of possible Sevillian origin are helpfulin confirming the nationality of the ship. Thesetypes of pottery were not traded in their own rightnor were normally used as commercial containers.This explains why they are so rare in northernEurope, where their presence must be due todirect contact with Spaniards; in England they arefound in major ports of international trade, suchas Exeter, Plymouth and Southampton whichwere involved in trade with the Mediterranean(Allan, 1995: 311; Gutierrez, 2000: 153). Theymay also appear aboard Spanish wrecks as part ofthe ship’s crockery and on Spanish settlements inthe American colonies (McEwan, 1992: 104;Marken, 1994; Martin, 1979).

As for the other types of pottery found onthe wreck, Merida-type ware costrels are asubiquitous on archaeological sites in the BritishIsles as Seville containers, and have been found on

34

about 100 sites (Gerrard et al., 1995: 288). ThesePortuguese costrels from the Alentejo area wereimported from the 13th century onwards and wereused as containers of foodstuffs and other prod-ucts, such as cinnabar (according to contentsanalysis; Evans, 1987: 205), a vermilion pigmentused in dyes, inks and paints. One of the bestcontexts provided for the use of these vessels isthat of the costrel found on board Henry VIII’sMary Rose, sunk in 1545. The costrel was foundinside a wooden chest in the barber surgeon’scabin, together with surgical tools and canistersfull of ointments, and might have contained someapothecary’s product of Mediterranean origin, forexample mercury or treacle (Gutierrez, 2000: 173).Other Merida-type products, such as thin-walledjars, dishes and bowls have a more limited distri-bution, but they also appear on British sitesespecially around main ports, and were alsopresent on the Armada ships (Blackmore, 1994:38; Clark, 1979; Martin, 1979).

The French pottery from the wreck includes aSaintonge pegau from south-west France, an areawhose products were primarily made for exportand are frequently found in Britain (Hurst et al.,1986: 77). On the other hand, the other Frenchvessel of Breton origin is one of only a handfulknown in Britain (from Dover, Plymouth, Stonarand Rye; Gaskell-Brown, 1986; Hodges, 1978;Macpherson-Grant, 1991). This jar or chaudron isone of the typical forms produced in the areaaround Boderes, whose workshops were activeuntil the 18th century, and found distributed onthe coast around Brittany (Giot, 1971). Its pres-ence aboard the wreck may be explained by theway in which long-distance journeys by sea werecarried out. Exchange was rarely direct betweenports on long-distance journeys; Spanish shipsbound for Flanders, their main market in north-ern Europe, would have followed a coastal route,hopping between ports along the Channel andAtlantic seaboards (Childs, 1978: 91; 1995: 20–21). This informal network provided a readymeans of re-stocking, collecting and exchangingcargo throughout the voyage and was flexibleenough to permit the indirect import of goodseven when political upheaval officially censoreddirect trade between countries.

The condition of the Studland Bay wreck onthe seabed means that little can be inferred nowabout the use and location of the pottery when theship went down. It seems most likely, however,that the coarsewares and lead-glazed wares wouldhave been used aboard the ship. One of the


brown-glazed jars, for example, has a sooted baseand exterior wall which seem to indicate it hadbeen involved in the cooking or preparation offood. The soot is quite distinctive and clearlydifferent to the other blackening effects that othersherds show due to the underwater conditions oftheir deposition. Pottery such as that used in thegalley of the ship would have been collected fromthe sailing port, but new or complementary piecesmust have been picked up on the voyage, either ascontainers for the foodstuffs bought at stoppingpoints or as replacements for breakages on board.The presence of the Seville orza and lead-glazedjars confirms that the ship must have stopped inthat city at some stage.

As to the finewares found in the wreck, theassemblage of lustrewares and Blue and Purplepots was probably being carried as cargo ratherthan being used on board. Lustrewares seem toohigh quality to risk breakage during everyday useby the crew, who are more likely to have eatenfrom wooden bowls like the one found on board,or off pewter or a plainer type of pottery. The bestclue to their purpose is the proportion of formspresent, the predominance of dishes, together withsome closed forms, but only very few bowls whichby this date were part of the tableware set. Thedecoration on all of these vessels is also verysimilar, as if it were a single batch of the sameproduction from a single workshop, with none ofthe odd pieces which might complement or fillgaps left by breakages, or such as might have beencollected over a period of time. The chemicalfabric analysis also confirms this uniformity (seeAppendix).

The ship has been identified as of Basque build(Thomsen, 2000: 81). Basque ships dominated inSpanish international trade during the MiddleAges and later, playing a crucial role in voyagesaround northern Europe, to the New World andin royal fleets, including the Armada (Childs,1978: 152; Rodrıguez Salgado, 1988: 159). Basqueships were to be found carrying iron from theirnorthern Spanish hinterland as well as carryingproducts from southern Spain. Poole CustomsAccounts for the beginning of the 16th centuryregister the arrival of ships from ports in thenorth of Spain (Renteria, San Sebastian, Pasages,Portugalete) bringing mainly iron but also figs,wine, sugar and soap, and leaving again withwheat and cloth (Hairsine et al., 1993). Pottery forsale may not have been aboard all of these shipsbut the presence of Basques buying tin-glazedceramics from Seville potters is documented at

least in one case in 1501, when a Bilbao manbought 212 vasos (unknown quantity) of fine-wares (loza) (Otte, 1996). It seems probable thatthe pottery was being shipped.

We may conclude that, while Spanish potteryreached northern Europe in several ways, it rarelyappears to have arrived as the exclusive cargoof a ship. More often pottery came in smallerquantities, sometimes collected at the stopping-offpoints along the long itinerary of ships orincluded among the small number of items whichindividual crew members negotiated for sale forpersonal profit (Gutierrez, 2000: 112).

The pottery recovered from the Studland Baywreck probably represents a couple of baskets fullof pots to be sold on arrival at port. The pots weremade in Seville and probably picked up there bythe ship, though whether the voyage began inSeville or the city was merely a stopping pointcannot be known. Whatever the case, the mech-anism of trade is in total contrast to the ways inwhich Seville pottery moved across the IberianPeninsula and across the Atlantic, and also seemsdifferent from the more substantial trade inSpanish pottery with northern Europe in the 14thand 15th centuries. By the time the Studland Bayship was making its approach to Poole harbour atthe beginning of the 16th century Italian andNetherlandish tin-glazed wares were beingimported to England in great numbers and hadreplaced in importance the popularity enjoyedby decorated Spanish wares (from Malaga andValencia) during the previous two centuries.

AcknowledgementsFree access to the archive and pottery at PooleWaterfront Museum has allowed this study tobe completed. John Hurst carried out an initialassessment of the pottery and organised thechemical analysis of the sherds, Bob Thomsonassisted in the early stages of identifying thepottery, and Keith Jarvis was involved in assess-ing the pottery and arranging illustration. Theauthor would like to thank Keith Jarvis for hishelp and encouragement in preparing this text,John Allan and John Cotter for their help with theBreton sherds and John Hurst for his commentson the text. Christopher Gerrard made sug-gestions for improvements and corrected theEnglish. Illustrations are by the author, potterydrawings are based on those drawn by LesleyCartwright, Janet Lewis and Ruth Holman.

35


ReferencesAllan, J., 1995, Iberian pottery imported into south-west England c. 1250–1600. In C. M. Gerrard, A. Gutierrez & A. Vince

(Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 299–314. Oxford.Amigues, F., 1995, La ceramica valenciana: sus tecnicas de fabricacion. In C. M. Gerrard, A. Gutierrez & A. Vince (Eds.),

Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 129–140. Oxford.Baxter, M., 1994, Exploratory Multivariate Statistics in Archaeology. Edinburgh.Blackmore, L., 1994, Pottery, the port and the populace: the imported pottery of London 1300–1600 (part 1). Medieval

Ceramics 18: 29–44.Childs, W. R., 1978, Anglo-Castilian trade in the Later Middle Ages. Manchester.Childs, W. R., 1995, Anglo-Spanish trade in the later Middle Ages: twelfth to sixteenth centuries. In C. M. Gerrard, A.

Gutierrez & A. Vince (Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 17–23.Oxford.

Clark, A., 1979, Merida Red. In C. Gaskell Brown, Plymouth Excavations: Castle Street: The Pottery. Plymouth MuseumArchaeological Series 1, 47–50.

Evans, D. H., 1987, Reflections on the study of imported ceramics. In B. Vyner & S. Wrathmell (Eds.), Studies in Medieval AndLater Pottery in Wales Presented to J. M. Lewis, 199–224. Cardiff.

Gaskell-Brown, C. (Ed.), 1986, Plymouth Excavations. The Medieval Waterfront, Woolster Street. The Finds. PlymouthMuseum Archaeological Series 3.

Gerrard, C. M., Gutierrez, A., Hurst, J. G. & Vince, A., 1995, A guide to Spanish medieval pottery. In C. M. Gerrard, A.Gutierrez & A. Vince (Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 281–295.Oxford.

Giot, P. R., 1971, La ceramique onctueuse de Cornouaille. Bulletin de la Societe Archeologique du Finistere 97: 109–130.Goggin, J. M., 1968, Spanish Maiolica in the New World: types of the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries. Yale University

Publications in Anthropology 72.Gutierrez, A., 2000, Mediterranean Pottery in Wessex Households. BAR British Series 306. Oxford.Gutierrez, A., forthcoming, Miscellaneous imported ceramics from Devon: Spanish pottery. In J. Allan, Further finds of

medieval and post-medieval imported pottery from Devon. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological Society.Hairsine, R. C. & Hairsine, P. B., 1993, Poole Customs Accounts 1520–30, unpublished report in the excavation archive, Poole

Waterfront Museum.Hodges, R., 1978, A ceramique onctueuse vessel from Dover: a Breton souvenir? Medieval Archaeology 22: 137–138.Hughes, M. J. & Vince, A. G., 1986, Neutron Activation Analysis and Petrology of Hispano-Moresque Pottery. In Olin, J. S.

& Blackman, M. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th International Archaeometry Symposium, 353–367. Washington.Hughes, M. J., 1995, Application of scientific analytical methods to Spanish Medieval ceramics. In Gerrard, C. M., Gutierrez,

A. & Vince, A. G. (Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 359–369.Oxford.

Hughes, M. J., Cowell, M. R. & Hook, D. R., 1991, Neutron Activation Analysis Procedures at the British Museum ResearchLaboratory. In Hughes, M. J., Cowell, M. R. & Hook, D. R. (Eds.), Neutron Activation and Plasma Emission SpectrometricAnalysis in Archaeology, 29–46. London.

Hurst, J. G., 1991, Post-medieval pottery from Seville imported into north-west Europe. In D. R. Hook & D. R. M. Gaimster(Eds.), Trade and Discovery: The Scientific Study of Artefacts from Post-Medieval Europe and Beyond. Occasional PaperBritish Museum 109: 45–54.

Hurst, J. G., Neal, D. S. & van Beuningen, H. J. E., 1986, Pottery Produced and Traded in North-West Europe 1350–1650.Rotterdam Papers VI.

Hutchinson, G., 1991, The early 16th century wreck at Studland Bay, Dorset. In R. Reinder & P. Kees (Eds.), CarvelConstruction Technique. Oxbow Monograph 12: 171–175. Oxford.

Ladle, L., 1993, The Studland Bay Wreck. Poole.Lister, F. C. & Lister, R. H., 1982, Sixteenth Century Maiolica Pottery in the Valley of Mexico. Tucson.Macpherson-Grant, N., 1991, Excavations at Stonar, near Sandwich. Canterbury’s Archaeology 1989–1990, 46–48.McEwan, B. G., 1992, The role of ceramics in Spain and Spanish America during the 16th century. In P. Farnsworth & J. S.

Williams (Eds.), The Archaeology of the Spanish Colonial and Mexican Republican Periods. Historical Archaeology 26.1:92–108.

Marken, M. W., 1994, Pottery from Spanish shipwrecks 1500–1800. Florida.Martin, C. J. M., 1979, Spanish Armada pottery. IJNA, 8.4: 279–302.Otte, E., 1996, Sevilla y sus mercaderes a fines de la Edad Media. Seville.Platt, C. & Coleman-Smith, R., 1975, Excavations in medieval Southampton. 1953–1969. Leicester.Pleguezuelo, A., 1996, Ceramicas de Triana. Coleccion Carranza. Seville.Pleguezuelo, A. & Lafuente, M. P., 1995, Ceramicas de Andalucıa Occidental (1200–1600). In C. M. Gerrard, A. Gutierrez &

A. Vince (Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 217–244. Oxford.Ponsford, M. & Burchill, R., 1995, Iberian pottery imported into Bristol 1200–1600. In C. M. Gerrard, A. Gutierrez & A. Vince

(Eds.), Spanish Medieval Ceramics in Spain and the British Isles. BAR International Series 610: 315–318. Oxford.Rodrıguez Salgado, M. J., 1988, Armada 1588–1988. An International Exhibition to Commemorate the Spanish Armada.

London.Sanchez, J. M., 1994, El oficio de ollero en Sevilla en el siglo XVI. Seville.

36


Sharma, S., 1996, Applied Multivariate Techniques. Chichester.Thompson, M. & Walsh, J. N., 1989, A Handbook of Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry. Glasgow.Thomsen, M., 2000, The Studland Bay wreck, Dorset, UK: hull analysis. IJNA, 29.1: 69–85.

Appendix
Macroscopic fabric descriptionThe following fabric descriptions have been carried out witha binocular microscope (�20 magnification):
Seville Lustreware and Blue and Purple [IsabelaPolychrome]: creamy colour throughout. No inclusionsvisible, except for sooty black dots, very occasional clayrelicts, some almost carbonised, and some elongate voids.

Merida-type costrel: pinkish red exterior surface (Munsell10R 5/8), and reddish core and interior surface (Munsell 2.5Y8/2). Inclusions: moderate quartz, white mica (in a variety ofsizes, from very small to large flakes up to 3 mm), well sortedclay relicts, sparse and large clear quartz, well rounded, verywell sorted; elongated voids.

?Seville lead-glazed jar: orange/brown throughout.Inclusions: abundant transparent quartz, well sorted, up to0·5 mm; sparse mica; occasional sooty black specks.

Breton coarseware: brown throughout (10YR 5/3); surfacespainted with a slip made of the same fabric, containingsuper-abundant mica dust which gives it a very shiny finishand golden colour. Fabric characterised by abundant largerock fragments. Large micaceous sandstone <4 mm across;transparent quartz <2 mm across; large clay relicts <2 mmacross; abundant voids (from rock fragments ripped out ofthe fabric); large fragments of pure platy mica <5 mm across.

A Note on the Petrology of two Pottery Sherdsfrom the Studland Bay WreckDavid WilliamsDepartment of Archaeology, University ofSouthampton1. PM38 523 Fragment of tin-glazed pottery

Thin sectioning shows an isotropic clay matrix dominated byfrequent silt-sized monocrystalline subangular grains ofquartz and small strands of mica, predominantly muscovitebut with a few pieces of biotite as well. Also present aremoderately common small pieces of opaque iron oxide, a fewsmall pieces of plagioclase felspar and a few larger quartzgrains. The fabric of this sherd is very similar in the rangeand texture of its non-plastic inclusions to later medievalpottery thought to have been made at Seville and previouslyexamined by the writer. The petrology would thus support aSeville origin for this sherd as suggested by chemical analysis.

2. PM38 673 Fragment of brown glazed pottery

In thin section this sherd shows a quite different, coarser,fabric to that of the tin-glazed sherd. Here the isotropic claymatrix is dominated by frequent ill-sorted subangular tosubrounded quartz grains, ranging up to 0·60 mm in size. Themajority of the grains are monocrystalline in texture withsome of the larger ones being polycrystalline. Also present

are some large discrete grains of orthoclase felspar, one ortwo with myrmekitic texture, strands of mica, chert, a fewweathered pieces of igneous and metamorphic rock and someopaque iron oxide. This assemblage of non-plastic inclusionsis characterised by its rather heterogeneous nature. Thepresence of a number of large grains of orthoclase felsparsuggests derivation from granitic-type rocks, though thepresence of chert and metamorphic rocks in the assemblagesuggest that the source is situated in a geologically complexregion. The river sediment of the Guadalquivir basin couldbe a suitable area, draining as it does from the Sierra Morenarange to the north. However, on the basis of fabric alone,other applicable areas in the Iberian peninsula shouldperhaps also be considered.

Chemical Analyses of Spanish Ceramics fromthe Studland Bay Wreck by ICP-AES and NeutronActivationM. J. Hughes

Introduction

Among the pottery recovered from the wreck in StudlandBay was a range of Spanish tin-glazed ceramics, some withdecayed lustre decoration. Previous work using chemicalanalysis on such ceramics has shown that it is now possible toattribute them to their place of production using scientificmethods (Hughes et al., 1986; Hughes, 1995). These ceramicsare normally identified as either Malagan or Valencian(depending upon date and decorative style). However therewere some indications that there had been production oflustreware at Seville, though no examples of such have todate been analysed. Two selections of these ceramics from thewreck have been analysed at different times and using twoanalytical methods, namely neutron activation analysis(NAA) and inductively-coupled plasma atomic emissionspectrometry (ICP-AES). The data from these two investiga-tions have been combined and compared to the previously-produced database of neutron activation analyses of Spanishceramics, to deduce the place of production of the StudlandBay ceramics.

Analysis methods and results

The first selection was done as part of the British Museum’sprogramme of neutron activation of Spanish ceramics(Hughes et al., 1986; Hughes, 1995). By the time the threelater pieces were analysed, the British Museum programmewas complete, and they were analysed by the widely-availabletechnique of ICP-AES which has proved a suitable successormethod to neutron activation (Thompson et al., 1989). Allthe ceramics selected for analysis were sampled with a 2 mmtungsten carbide drill to avoid sample contamination, andthe resulting powder used for analysis. Sufficient sample wastaken to provide a representative sample of the body fabric,while minimising the physical damage to these importantfragments. For analysis by ICP-AES,[1] weighed portions ofthe powders were dissolved in a mixture of acids and the

37


38

Tab

le1.

Che

mic

alan

alys

esof

Stu

dlan

dB

ayce

ram

ics

byin

duct

ivel

y-co

uple

dpl

asm

aat

omic

emis

sion

spec

trom

etry

(IC

P-A

ES

)

Al 2

O3

Fe 2

O3

MgO

CaO

Na 2

OK

2O

TiO

2P

2O

5M

nOB

aC

oC

rC

uL

iN

bN

iSc

SrV

YZ

nZ

rL

aC

eN

dSm

Eu

Dy

Yb

4753

-212

·19

5·85

3·5

19·0

21·

311·

610·

530·

140·

0732

722

7978

4112

4312

484

9025

7075

2659

305·

80·

93·

32

4753

-312

·18

4·92

2·64

17·3

51·

101·

870·

580·

140·

0730

220

7158

3913

3912

461

8522

8264

2860

295·

80·

93

1·7

4753

-413

·39

6·79

3·7

17·2

81·

131·

750·

610·

150·

0835

321

8755

5814

4813

398

104

2684

7829

6331

6·2

0·9

3·4

2

Con

vers

ion

fact

ors

used

for

mak

ing

the

ICP

resu

lts

com

para

ble

tone

utro

nac

tiva

tion

anal

yses

ofSt

udla

ndB

ayce

ram

ics:

Oxi

deto

elem

ent

1·43

1·39

91·

351·

21In

terc

ept

�34

9·4

24·3

1·5

30·6

�8·

4�

2·3

Slop

e1·

003

0·88

50·

840·

811·

019

0·71

30·

619

2·19

0·90

40·

636

1·38

41·

005

0·97

31·

065

0·69

70·

505

Con

vers

ion

ofth

eIC

Pre

sult

sw

asca

rrie

dou

tas

follo

ws:

the

oxid

ere

sult

s(e

.g.

Fe2

O3)

wer

eco

nver

ted

toth

eel

emen

t(e

.g.

Fe)

bydi

vidi

ngby

the

fact

orin

the

‘oxi

deto

elem

ent’

line.

The

‘inte

rcep

t’va

lue

was

then

subt

ract

ed(o

rad

ded

ifth

ein

terc

ept

isne

gati

ve),

and

the

resu

ltin

gnu

mbe

ris

then

divi

ded

byth

e‘s

lope

’fa

ctor

.F

orth

eel

emen

tsal

read

yex

pres

sed

asth

eel

emen

t,on

lyth

ein

terc

ept

and

slop

efa

ctor

sw

ere

appl

ied.

The

elem

ents

inco

mm

onbe

twee

nth

etw

om

etho

dsar

eth

ose

wit

hnu

mbe

rsin

the

‘slo

pe’

line.

4753

-2lu

stre

onbl

ue,

smal

lsh

erd

PM

38/1

990/

470.

4753

-3ba

sefr

agm

ent

ofth

umbe

d’bo

wl

PM

38/8

416

(see

ms

topa

rtof

asi

mila

rve

ssel

toP

M38

/78

S43)

.47

53-4

plat

e(2

join

edfr

agm

ents

)pa

inte

din

lust

reP

M38

71&

3872

.


Tab

le2.

Che

mic

alan

alys

esof

Stu

dlan

dB

ayce

ram

ics

byne

utro

nac

tiva

tion

Item

No.

BM

RL

Des

crip

tion

Na

KR

bC

sC

aSc

Fe

Cr

Co

La

Ce

Eu

SmL

uY

bH

fT

hT

aT

bU

Ba

As

Sb

S10

4464

3VIs

abel

apo

lych

rom

e1·

471·

8176

5·76

8·0

13·9

3·92

106

14·8

35·3

68·9

1·41

6·99

0·47

32·

636·

3311

·71·

120·

883·

029

316

1·8

S45

4464

4TIs

abel

apo

lych

rom

e0·

721·

7372

5·38

9·7

12·5

3·70

9514

·834

·265

·81·

396·

590·

425

2·31

5·04

11·0

0·78

0·78

3·6

236

272·

3S5

044

645R

Isab

ela

poly

chro

me

0·79

2·05

865·

9310

·713

·33·

7696

15·1

34·1

67·5

1·44

6·57

0·43

82·

595·

4711

·50·

930·

782·

435

814

1·6

S32

4464

6Plu

stre

,ba

nded

1·00

1·43

726·

4411

·812

·43·

5899

17·9

35·7

70·7

1·44

7·33

0·50

12·

526·

2711

·71·

000·

882·

130

916

3·3

S49

4464

7Ylu

stre

wit

hlin

esan

dre

vers

elu

stre

0·94

1·21

767·

818·

413

·84·

1511

214

·537

·770

·71·

537·

810·

440

3·00

6·13

12·9

1·21

0·93

3·0

356

232·

2

S27

4464

8Wlu

stre

?w

ith

fake

arab

icw

riti

ng0·

871·

7079

5·41

9·9

12·6

3·60

9813

·034

·067

·71·

356·

990·

428

2·52

6·47

11·7

1·25

0·85

2·1

338

151·

6S3

044

649U

lust

re?

wit

hfa

kear

abic

wri

ting

0·75

1·73

755·

3010

·912

·53·

6997

15·3

34·5

68·0

1·46

6·99

0·44

12·

615·

8112

·01·

230·

922·

242

816

2·1

S48

4465

0Xlu

stre

?w

ith

fake

arab

icw

riti

ng0·

572·

1086

5·09

9·4

12·4

3·62

9616

·733

·967

·41·

486·

830·

392

2·63

5·50

11·5

1·08

0·99

2·3

288

152·

5S5

444

651V

glaz

elo

st,

inci

sed

0·68

2·12

915·

5812

·311

·73·

4085

12·6

33·8

63·1

1·37

6·67

0·34

42·

395·

5110

·41·

170·

772·

432

215

2·2

S51

4465

2T?l

ustr

e0·

871·

4986

6·16

9·3

12·6

3·71

9016

·634

·265

·81·

403·

840·

427

2·42

6·05

11·4

1·27

0·91

2·3

282

162·

3S5

244

653R

?Yay

alB

lue

orlu

stre

0·86

1·46

583·

689·

18·

42·

5862

8·3

23·2

47·1

0·89

4·74

0·25

71·

823·

847·

50·

680·

601·

629

616

1·1

S53

4465

4P?l

ustr

e1·

021·

5383

6·21

11·0

12·2

3·49

8916

·733

·366

·71·

376·

570·

475

2·76

5·59

11·3

1·17

0·87

2·1

328

132·

3

All

resu

lts

are

inpa

rts

per

mill

ion

inth

ece

ram

ics,

exce

ptN

a,K

,C

aan

dF

ew

hich

are

inpe

rcen

t.B

MR

L:

Bri

tish

Mus

eum

labo

rato

ryan

alys

isnu

mbe

r.

Ele

men

tsy

mbo

ls:

Na,

sodi

um;K

,pot

assi

um;R

b,ru

bidi

um;C

s,ca

esiu

m;C

a,ca

lciu

m;S

c,sc

andi

um;F

e,ir

on;C

r,ch

rom

ium

;Co,

coba

lt;L

a,la

ntha

num

;Ce,

ceri

um;

Eu,

eurp

oium

;Sm

,sam

ariu

m;L

u,lu

teti

um;Y

b,yt

terb

ium

;Hf,

hafn

ium

;Th,

thor

ium

;U,u

rani

um;T

b,te

rbiu

m;T

a,ta

ntal

um;B

a,ba

rium

;As,

arse

nic;

Sb,a

ntim

ony.

39


Figure A1. Plot of the first two principal components arising fromanalyses of Spanish ceramics from Studland Bay and ceramics known tohave been made at Seville. The analyses were carried out by eitherneutron activation or ICP and have been combined for this test. The firstcomponent is particularly associated to the right with higher concen-trations in the ceramic of iron, lanthanum cerium, scandium, chromiumand cobalt and lower concentrations of potassium; the second componenthas ceramics with lower concentrations at the top of the Figure in theelement sodium and higher concentrations of calcium and barium.

resulting solution sprayed into the plasma (flame) of an ICPspectrometer, which was calibrated with solutions containingknown amounts of the elements sought. This method allowedthe determination of the concentrations of 29 elements ineach ceramic, and the results on the three Studland ceramicsare given in Table 1. For analysis by neutron activation, theprocedure adopted at the British Museum was used (Hugheset al., 1991), namely irradiation of the powders in a batchtogether with portions of British Museum Standard Potteryfor calibration. The irradiated samples were returned to theMuseum, unpacked and the isotopes of the elements pro-duced in the ceramic were detected by counting the samplestwice with a high-purity germanium detection system undercomputer control. The concentrations of up to 23 elementswere determined in each sample, and the results for theStudland ceramics are given in Table 2. The two methodsanalyse for a slightly different range of chemical elements.Tests have been carried out in which the same samples havebeen analysed by both methods and the results compared.[2]

This showed that after adjustment for laboratory factors, theresults by the two methods could be combined.[3]

40

Principal components analysis

Principal components is a convenient statistical means ofsimultaneously examining all the chemical analysis results onan object (Baxter, 1994; Sharma, 1996). The neutron acti-vation and ICP results on the Studland ceramics were madecompatible by converting the ICP results using the factors inTable 1, and then combined with the NAA dataset on Sevilleceramics. Sixteen elements are measured in common by bothmethods—identified by having numbers in the ‘slope’ line ofTable 1—and only these could be used in the principalcomponents. A principal components analysis was carriedout on the combined dataset of neutron activation andICP-AES results using the computer-based SPSS statisticalpackage. The first two principal component scores arisingfrom the analysis are shown in Figure A1. Items of potterywhich have very similar chemical analyses across a wholerange of elements will plot close to each other on such agraph. Groups of such points suggest very similar clays wereused for the pottery fabric. The points have been labelledaccording to the ceramics style or type of tin-glazed pottery.


Three of these labelled styles (Columbia Plain, IsabelaPolychrome and Tiles) are from the NAA database andrepresent ceramics known to have been made at Seville.These three tend to occupy slightly different areas of FigureA1. The plain tin-glazed or Columbia Plain ceramics includepottery from some sub-groups within the style, and notsurprisingly are more scattered in spread in the Figure. Thethree labelled styles show the range of chemical compositiontypical of Seville pottery for this period, and the groupingtogether of points with the same symbol show there arechemical composition sub-groups present. These sub-groupsarise from the use of slightly different clay resources, whichmight either represent different periods of productionor different places geographically within the city ofSeville. These three styles provide reference material forSeville pottery. The analyses of the Studland Bay ceramicswere compared against these reference ceramics by includingthe Studland ceramics in the same principal componentsanalysis. It is immediately evident that the symbols represent-ing the analyses of the individual pieces of Studland potteryfall within the range of the composition of Seville ceramics.Like the Blue and Purple/Isabela Polychrome and Tilesamples they tend to occupy a relatively small space within

the graph. This suggests that they represent a very limitedproduction, perhaps overall the products of one or twoworkshops. Two workshops may be represented since thesymbols of the Studland ceramics seem to fall into twoslightly different but tightly-defined chemical groups inFigure A1. Some Renaissance maiolica found at Barcelona[4]

and also analysed by ICP-AES has also been included in theprincipal components and seems to form two sub-groupswhich nevertheless fall within the chemical compositionrange of Seville ceramics as shown in Figure A1.

Conclusions

All the Spanish ceramics from the Studland Bay wreckanalysed by either neutron activation or ICP have a chemicalcomposition which falls within the range established forceramics known to have been made at Seville. A significantfeature has been to establish that lustre was being manufac-tured at Seville, and that these products have been identifiedas such by chemical analysis. The three sherds analysed byICP have also proved to have the chemical compositiontypical of production at Seville.

Notes[1] The ICP-AES analyses were carried out in the Department of Geology, Royal Holloway, University of London, under the

supervision of Dr J. N. Walsh.[2] Hughes, unpublished report on duplicate analyses of Greek pottery from al Mina, Syria.[3] The factors are given in Table 1.[4] Samples provided by Anthony Ray.

41

Documents

A shipwreck cargo of Sevillian pottery from the Studland Bay wreck, Dorset, UK